pull down to refresh
100 sats \ 3 replies \ @elvismercury 11 May \ on: Re: "Bitcoin is money built on distrust." When is trust good and when is it bad? culture
There's a quote I read and can't attribute, but that I love:
So many layers. Worthy of deep meditation.
reply
I didn't think about this till now, but this is really just an implicit prisoner's dilemma game, and cad-ness is basically defaulting on something on something of medium and below consequence; so the question is: when would you like to default? When everyone else is defaulting, or everyone else is cooperating?
The real essence of being a cad is that the defaults aren't so costly that really bad consequences ensue. If you're the only guy stealing pies from windowsills, they probably roll their eyes. If everyone is doing it, the pie-makers start shooting people.
Anyway, the real thing I came to say is this:
It's probably also fun to be a saint in a high-trust society.
Very possibly not. Don't have time to search for original text, but:
Durkheim imagines a ‘society of saints’ populated by perfect individuals. In such a society there might be no murder or robbery, but there would still be deviance. The general standards of behaviour would be so high that the slightest slip would be regarded as a serious offence. Thus the individual who simply showed bad taste, or was merely impolite, would attract strong disapproval.
From here. This is another idea taking up major real-estate in my head.
reply
When everyone else is defaulting, or everyone else is cooperating?
For the cad (if the game isn't iterated), always. Otherwise, I think people start defecting when they suspect everyone else is. If you'll be shot walking by windowsills, you might as well try to get a pie out of it.
Durkheim imagines a ‘society of saints’ populated by perfect individuals.
In a society with uniform behavior any variance "would attract strong disapproval," but that's mostly a function of its uniformity, isn't it? Both cooperative people and cads would prefer a society where people cooperate, because both stand to benefit from counterparties cooperating. That was my original point at least.
reply